Short question:
Sony A99 (non-existent) with ZA 24/2 50/1.4 and ZA 135/1.8
Or,
D800 with afs 24/2.8 (non-existent) 50/1.4 and 135/1.8 (non existent)
Long question:
As some of you know, I want to purchase a full frame camera. Now that Canon and Nikon have been launched and Sony to follow suit, I can finally do it.
I want to have a 24mm, a 50 and a 135. I love these focal lengths and have shot with them quite a lot. In fact, most of my pictures have been shot at 24mm focal length.
http://www.fluidr.com/photos/agnihot/interesting
http://www.flickr.com/photos/agnihot/set...540388908/
And here comes the problem:
Sony has the best 135 (za) and the best 24 (za) but the camera is yet to arrive. On the other hand, D800 is there, but there is no afs 24 (1.4 version is expensive for me) and their 135 is not a compelling choice either, being an old lens...(They are coming up with a 28/1.8 which is fine with me, and they seem to have plans for 135/1.8 VR but it can't be relied upon and may take 2 years to materialize).
My question is, do you think zeiss route makes more sense? Sony has the lenses I need, I will use my D5100 till next few months till a Sony FF cam arrives, which won't be long i think.
I have shot with a SLT in the past and I like few things about them...especially the af and the speed of shooting while in live view (with an articulated screen)...on a normal dslr, live view seems to be not so usable for general/street shooting.
I am thinking...isn't it better to take a lens to camera route than a camera (D800) to lens route...??
nandadevieast
Is there a reason why you ruled out Canon? If you're free to choose any system, the 5D III with 24 IS, 50/1.4 and 135 L seems to fit your needs and is fully available soon (unlike the other two options you mentioned).
-- Markus
my 2 cents and probably not worth even that -
1. you mentioned sony so.......for me the disappointment has been that someone at sony gave zeiss a contact to design lenses for sony - if this had not been the case i would not have bought into sony at all, although for me the za's are super and i still like the 900's sensor but coming into contact with this brand has been less than perfect for me - once you're in you have to have continuing contact with the sales, marketing, repair, and various forums specific to that brand so you'd better be happy with your selection, and sorry, but i'm not - my mistake - the sensor and the za's ok, it's everything in-between :-)
2. everyone seems to be rushing out to say that the D800 is the bee's knees - this may or may not be the case - my suggestion would be to wait and see the results from that sensor
3. it's very difficult or impossible to improve pictures from a poor lens - with sensors at the top of each range this seems to be less of a problem in that, for example, i seem to be able to match my 7D's pictures to my 900.....if i need to..... but i'm finding that the 7D's pictures are lovely....on the other hand there seems to be an exception to this rule, ahem, the....[size="1"]nex 7....??. :-([/size]
4. for me current evf's are a problem that i don't need - lag, flashing, contrast you name it - articulated screen, live view is for you to choose, i find ovf works for everything i do -
5. the main problems for me are - (1): needing to find adaptors from one mount to another so that beautiful lenses can travel - and (2): brand fascists......they are worse than tiring
Hi,
I love 135L, i have shot with it.
Yes you're right about Canon having these lenses, but i don't want to buy 5DMIII. (i shoot at lower ISO's, center point focus and no high fps for me, but i need higher resolution in order to print big or with more detail)
I also like (not prefer) SLT cameras, which let me use the live view without slowing down, and they have IS too...so A99 type camera can be an equally good option for me, especially if they use the D800 sensor too. But most importantly, the 2 zeiss primes are really very good. I will be street happy with them.
Does the plan work for you?
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1331831764' post='16733']
Is there a reason why you ruled out Canon? If you're free to choose any system, the 5D III with 24 IS, 50/1.4 and 135 L seems to fit your needs and is fully available soon (unlike the other two options you mentioned).
-- Markus
[/quote]
[quote name='asnwd' timestamp='1331832357' post='16734']
my 2 cents and probably not worth even that -
[/quote]
No reason to be so hard with yourself <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
-- Markus
[quote name='nandadevieast' timestamp='1331832756' post='16735']
Does the plan work for you?
[/quote]
Yes ... except you'll never know when that camera will happen. You could, of course, try to get along with an A900 until then.
Looking at your portfolio (nice stuff in there, btw.) I wonder what sizes you're going to print that you really benefit from the increased resolution above 22 MP?
For your purposes, the D800 seems the weakest option due to the lack of lenses you're looking for, at least for now. That's why I'd try to decide between Sony and Canon instead. The 5D III may not have the resolution you need or at least want to have, but its high ISO performance could be useful for some of your street subjects.
-- Markus
[quote name='nandadevieast' timestamp='1331832756' post='16735']
Hi,
I love 135L, i have shot with it.
Yes you're right about Canon having these lenses, but i don't want to buy 5DMIII. (i shoot at lower ISO's, center point focus and no high fps for me, but i need higher resolution in order to print big or with more detail)
I also like (not prefer) SLT cameras, which let me use the live view without slowing down, and they have IS too...so A99 type camera can be an equally good option for me, especially if they use the D800 sensor too. But most importantly, the 2 zeiss primes are really very good. I will be street happy with them.
Does the plan work for you?
[/quote]
For me, the essence is the character and qualities of the lens, much less the body choice. I am not sure just how big you want to print, but with my by now lower end 12mp APS-C camera I have no problem printing with excellent results on for instance 75 x 50cm. So, while 24, 36mp sounds great, I would be fine with 18 or 21mp too.
What I very much dislike about SLT is EVF. EVF gives an interpretation of a scene by the camera's computer derived from the current camera settings... An OVF gives me a view of the scene, from which I can decide what settings I would like to achieve a result I can imagine. Quite a fundamental difference, for me. Besides that, I do not like the more artificial, flat feel of an EVF, nor problems using it in certain lighting situations. Nor any lag they still give. Personal I am sure, but food for thought.
Personally, I can not see a use for me for a 135mm portrait lens and IS. Portrait and IS just does not sit will together for me. I am sure someone else will feel/see a purpose for that, under certain low light conditions with a static subject.
The Canon 24mm f2.8, new Canon 24mm f2.8 IS are very good too, as is the more expensive and heavy 24mm f1.4. The Zeiss of course opens up more, but in your (really nice) portfolio I have not seen a photographer with a love for shallow DOF (like I am). So, not sure if that is worthwhile for you or not. And, as you have testified, the 135mm f2 from Canon is a lovely lens too.
Because of my dislike for current EVF implementations, an A99 would not be a consideration for me. Both the D800 and 5D mk III outspec what I would need anyway, and if both are equally nice in usage, both I would be very happy with. For me the 5D would have a bit of a plus still, because of certain lenses which suit me.
I never used a Sony camera, but for me the Sony world is tempting when it comes to
- contact with Zeiss
- old but stellar Minolta lenses
- 135mm F/2.8 STF lens itself
Personally, I believe that the investment should be biased towards lenses. The camera, -or in a limited sense- the sensor is also important but today's FF sensors are all good enough to produce a decent image and they're capable of making large prints.
I believe one should consider the four elements in photography: the photographer, the lens, the camera and the subject/scene. Given that the photographer is capable of taking nice pictures (as we can see from your images shared) and the places and people are quite a match for your photography, I think the 2 factors in between could be taken into consideration in the order they're mentioned.
Serkan
My nickel worth; my primary rejection of canon and nikon is weight. To be honest a few years ago in my book canon was the clear value winner but in the past 4 or 5 years canon has significantly raised their prices on lenses and many of nikon newer bodies and lenses have been quite decent (though I still dislike corporate nikon policies - this is specific to usa - so ignoring the weight issue I would never touch a nikon).
-
I felt Sony did a very good job with the A900 but their lens system is somewhat limited and very expensive for certain lenses. If limited to the two lenses you mentioned I would definitely go with Sony but the system as a whole has a lot of holes (such as 70-200f4).
-
Anyways the A99 might be an interesting camera esp if Sony cuts the weight by 150g or 200g (think nex style full frame with evf).
(I realize the a99 is probably going to be similar to the a77 but full frame).
-
Given your specific requirement (3 lenses) I would go with the Sony but I might also consider one of the two older full frames (A850 and A900). They have extremely good view finders - (I felt the a900 noticeably nicer than the 5Dmk2 for manual focus) and very good colour resolution.Probably the only major improvement with the newer body will be in the area of noise at higher iso and perhaps a bit more resolution.
Can one still buy an A900?